OBAMA AS A PEACE PRESIDENT

No, he didn’t deserve the Nobel Peace Prize and I think the Nobel Committee knew it! by Charlie Leck

A fellow local writer and commentator, Andy Driscoll, makes the following searing and insightful comment about President Obama and his Oslo speech at the Nobel Peace Prize ceremonies:

“Obama's speech is being hailed for being a ‘post-WWII liberal president's proper perspective’ - and ‘balanced’ in its realistic assessment of evil and the moral authority of war. If analyzed in the harsh light of day, this man's approach - his references to Gandhi and King and Roosevelt notwithstanding - is almost as committed to preemptory violence and a role as US global cop as our last president. It makes a mockery of the Peace Prize as Nobel envisioned it and as we've come to expect the committee to decide its recipients.”

Just for the record, plenty of people have hailed the speech and some have called it “historic.” I personally think the President is in a bind. He would never have let the nation get dragged into Iraq and he would have handled matters in Afghanistan much more capably than the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld triumvirate did, keeping our purposes much more on mission. Now he has to clean things up in a sensible manner that will cause the least amount of damage to those two nations (Afghanistan and Iraq).

Y’all know how hard I’ve been, in my comments on this blog, on our President. Though I share the frustration Andy shows above, I’m not endorsing this statement. This President may yet reveal his deep yearning for lasting peace around the globe. In his speech, he questions himself whether he deserved such an honor, but also pledged an attempt to prove himself worthy of it. I believe that’s what the Nobel Committee was hoping for!

Every day, however, the President is looking more and more like a one-termer, so he’d better get hoofing.

To see a video of Obama’s speech at the Nobel ceremonies, click here!